Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis
Background: To identify and compare the shade variations of various commonly used esthetic dental ceramics by calculating their total-color-difference (ΔE) and translucency parameter (TP) using a spectrophotometer. Methods: In total, 165 disc specimens from three shades (A1, B1, and C1) of five cera...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/ace552e62523483eb5156a8c92e6efd4 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:ace552e62523483eb5156a8c92e6efd4 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:ace552e62523483eb5156a8c92e6efd42021-11-25T17:17:43ZVariations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis10.3390/cryst111112882073-4352https://doaj.org/article/ace552e62523483eb5156a8c92e6efd42021-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/2073-4352/11/11/1288https://doaj.org/toc/2073-4352Background: To identify and compare the shade variations of various commonly used esthetic dental ceramics by calculating their total-color-difference (ΔE) and translucency parameter (TP) using a spectrophotometer. Methods: In total, 165 disc specimens from three shades (A1, B1, and C1) of five ceramic materials (<i>N</i> = 55/shade; <i>n</i> = 11/ceramic material group) were prepared (Metal-ceramic (MC), IPS e.max press (Emax-P), IPS e.max layer (Emax-L), Layered Zirconia (Zr-L) and Monolithic zirconia (Zr-M)). With a spectrophotometer, the L* a* b* values were obtained. Total color differences (ΔE = [(ΔL*)2 + (Δa*)2 + (Δb*)2]<sup>1/2</sup>) and translucency parameter (TP = [(L*B − L*W)<sup>2</sup> + (a*B − a*W)<sup>2</sup> + (b*B – b*W)<sup>2</sup>]<sup>1/2</sup>) were calculated. The statistical tests included ANOVA and Post hoc Tukey’s analysis (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Results: Significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.000) were found between the groups for ΔE. Highest ΔE (A1) were found for Zr-L (80.18 ± 20) and lowest for Zr-M (62.97 ± 1.28). For B1, highest ΔE values were noted for MC (76.85 + 0.78) and lowest for the Emax-L (62.13 ± 1.49). For C1, highest ΔE values were found for the MC group (73.96 ± 0 67) and lowest for Emax-P (55.09 ± 1.76). Translucency variations between tested ceramics were revealed (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Highest TP values (A1) were found for Emax-L (2.99 ± 1.64) and lowest for Zr-L (0.35 ± 0.16). For B1, highest TP values were noted for Emax-P (3.50 ± 1.74) and lowest for MC (0.57 ± 0.40). For C1, highest TP values were found for Emax-P (4.46 ± 2.42) and lowest for MC (0.58 ± 0 48). Conclusions: Significant differences in ΔE and TP were found for tested ceramic groups. The color differences of the tested materials varied according to clinical acceptability, even with the selection of same color/shade. The color/shades of the various dental ceramics do not match with the vita shade guide tabs, to which they are compared most often. Shade differences are present between different lots of ceramic materials from the same or different brands.Syed Rashid HabibAbdulaziz Saud Al RashoudTurki Ali SafhiAbdulrahman Hamad AlmajedHamad Ali AlnafisahSalwa Omar BajunaidAbdulaziz S. AlqahtaniMohammed AlqahtaniMDPI AGarticledental ceramicsdental shadetranslucency parametercolor differencedelta EceramicsCrystallographyQD901-999ENCrystals, Vol 11, Iss 1288, p 1288 (2021) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
dental ceramics dental shade translucency parameter color difference delta E ceramics Crystallography QD901-999 |
| spellingShingle |
dental ceramics dental shade translucency parameter color difference delta E ceramics Crystallography QD901-999 Syed Rashid Habib Abdulaziz Saud Al Rashoud Turki Ali Safhi Abdulrahman Hamad Almajed Hamad Ali Alnafisah Salwa Omar Bajunaid Abdulaziz S. Alqahtani Mohammed Alqahtani Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| description |
Background: To identify and compare the shade variations of various commonly used esthetic dental ceramics by calculating their total-color-difference (ΔE) and translucency parameter (TP) using a spectrophotometer. Methods: In total, 165 disc specimens from three shades (A1, B1, and C1) of five ceramic materials (<i>N</i> = 55/shade; <i>n</i> = 11/ceramic material group) were prepared (Metal-ceramic (MC), IPS e.max press (Emax-P), IPS e.max layer (Emax-L), Layered Zirconia (Zr-L) and Monolithic zirconia (Zr-M)). With a spectrophotometer, the L* a* b* values were obtained. Total color differences (ΔE = [(ΔL*)2 + (Δa*)2 + (Δb*)2]<sup>1/2</sup>) and translucency parameter (TP = [(L*B − L*W)<sup>2</sup> + (a*B − a*W)<sup>2</sup> + (b*B – b*W)<sup>2</sup>]<sup>1/2</sup>) were calculated. The statistical tests included ANOVA and Post hoc Tukey’s analysis (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Results: Significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.000) were found between the groups for ΔE. Highest ΔE (A1) were found for Zr-L (80.18 ± 20) and lowest for Zr-M (62.97 ± 1.28). For B1, highest ΔE values were noted for MC (76.85 + 0.78) and lowest for the Emax-L (62.13 ± 1.49). For C1, highest ΔE values were found for the MC group (73.96 ± 0 67) and lowest for Emax-P (55.09 ± 1.76). Translucency variations between tested ceramics were revealed (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Highest TP values (A1) were found for Emax-L (2.99 ± 1.64) and lowest for Zr-L (0.35 ± 0.16). For B1, highest TP values were noted for Emax-P (3.50 ± 1.74) and lowest for MC (0.57 ± 0.40). For C1, highest TP values were found for Emax-P (4.46 ± 2.42) and lowest for MC (0.58 ± 0 48). Conclusions: Significant differences in ΔE and TP were found for tested ceramic groups. The color differences of the tested materials varied according to clinical acceptability, even with the selection of same color/shade. The color/shades of the various dental ceramics do not match with the vita shade guide tabs, to which they are compared most often. Shade differences are present between different lots of ceramic materials from the same or different brands. |
| format |
article |
| author |
Syed Rashid Habib Abdulaziz Saud Al Rashoud Turki Ali Safhi Abdulrahman Hamad Almajed Hamad Ali Alnafisah Salwa Omar Bajunaid Abdulaziz S. Alqahtani Mohammed Alqahtani |
| author_facet |
Syed Rashid Habib Abdulaziz Saud Al Rashoud Turki Ali Safhi Abdulrahman Hamad Almajed Hamad Ali Alnafisah Salwa Omar Bajunaid Abdulaziz S. Alqahtani Mohammed Alqahtani |
| author_sort |
Syed Rashid Habib |
| title |
Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| title_short |
Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| title_full |
Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| title_fullStr |
Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Variations in the Shades of Contemporary Dental Ceramics: An In Vitro Analysis |
| title_sort |
variations in the shades of contemporary dental ceramics: an in vitro analysis |
| publisher |
MDPI AG |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/ace552e62523483eb5156a8c92e6efd4 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT syedrashidhabib variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT abdulazizsaudalrashoud variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT turkialisafhi variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT abdulrahmanhamadalmajed variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT hamadalialnafisah variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT salwaomarbajunaid variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT abdulazizsalqahtani variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis AT mohammedalqahtani variationsintheshadesofcontemporarydentalceramicsaninvitroanalysis |
| _version_ |
1718412552179810304 |